Victoria’s Secret Model Quits ‘for My Husband’

Model Kylie Bisutti, 21, has decided to leave Victoria’s Secret because it clashes with her Christian beliefs.

“My body should only be for my husband and it’s just a sacred thing,” Bisutti told FOX411′s Pop Tarts column.  “I didn’t really want to be that kind of role model for younger girls because I had a lot of younger Christian girls that were looking up to me and then thinking that it was OK for them to walk around and show their bodies in lingerie to guys.”

Bisutti beat out 10,000 hopefuls in 2009 to win the Victoria’s Secret Model Search. She was 19 and recently married at the time.

“Victoria’s Secret was my absolutely biggest goal in life, and it was all I ever wanted career-wise. I actually loved it while I was there, it was so much fun and I had a blast. But the more I was modeling lingerie – and lingerie isn’t clothing – I just started becoming more uncomfortable with it because of my faith,” Bisutti told FOX411. “I’m Christian, and reading the Bible more, I was becoming more convicted about it.”

On Dec. 1, the day after the nationally televised Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show in which Bisutti didn’t appear, the model posted to her Twitter page, “For all of you that were looking for me in the Victorias Secret runway show this year, I wasn’t in it. I have decided not to model lingerie Because I personally feel that I am not honoring God or my husband by doing it. My marriage is very important & with divorce rates rising I want to do everything I can to protect my marriage and be respectful to my husband. God graciously gave me this marriage and this life and my desire is to live a Godly faithful life, I don’t however judge others for what they do. Everyone is convicted on different levels.”

Bisutti hasn’t completely given up on modeling just yet. The beauty also posted to her Twitter page, “I am still modeling but only with brands that respect my decision not to wear lingerie. I am also doing TV work now :).”

So what do you think about this? A reasonable decision to stop selling her body or hypocritical since she has achieved fame by doing so and now is changing her tune along the lines of Kim Cardashian launching her career based off a sex tape? And what of a 21 year old who is married and born again Christian enrolling in a Victoria’s Secret Model Search to begin with? Is the Christian respect for her husband appropriate or sexist?
Please discuss.
About Tom Matlack

Thomas Matlack is a venture capitalist.

Comments

  1. Michelle says:

    I think that’s kind of selfish of her. She entered a contest to be an UNDERWEAR MODEL. Victoria’s Secret sells UNDER WEAR. If she was sooo modest then how did she win? Because she looks good in underwear and swim suits. That’s what models do,t hey model a companies products. if she was that modest she’d have done regular catalog work, not high end.

  2. I admire your conviction. Some of the above remarks show that the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him…May the Lord bless you as you delight yourself in the Lord and He shall give you the desires of your heart.

  3. Good for her, I’m pround of her decision. We need more young peolpe to stand up for there believe. You Go Girl and may God Bless you.

  4. What I can’t get over is the way she stated that being a Victoria’s secret model is all she’s ever wanted to do but she’s giving it up for her marriage. The message I take from all this is to give up our dreams for a man. I can’t think of a more damaging message to send young girls. A marriage that really works is often based on the sharing of dreams. if you don’t have the same ideas for the future one or both of you is never going to be happy in that future. The only good thing I can take away from this is as a general rule, people jut shouldn’t get marriage at such a young age

    • I think this is the part of it that bugs me too. It’s either saying ‘give up your dreams for a man,’ or ‘give up your dreams for religion.’ Either way it’s a negative message to send. People have a right to not do certain jobs because of their religion, so that doesn’t bug me. She has a right to quit because she’s becoming a more fundamental Christian, (not in a bad way necessarily). But the way she posted it on Twitter and the way she framed her announcement, as if she was stopping her life to focus everything onto her marriage was troublesome.

      • wellokaythen says:

        I thought the same thing. Giving up your one big dream because you got married?

        Of course, if *becoming* a VS model was her big dream, she achieved it, so maybe there’s a sort of “been there, done that” aspect to it.

        And, we have to consider her age. She says at 19 being a VS model was all she ever wanted. She was only 19. How long could she have been dreaming about it? 4 years maybe? A lifelong dream at 19 is not exactly a lifelong dream at 49. (If she had been dreaming about being a VS model since she was 5, then there are much bigger problems here….)

        I can understand the principle of it, but I wonder where it ends. No bikini when she goes to the beach? No aerobics classes with any men in the room? No going to see a male doctor? Only modeling hejabs and burqas?

      • Perhaps it isn’t a matter of her stopping her life to focus everything into her marriage. Perhaps it’s a matter of her starting her life to focus on something she considers more valuable then a career with VS?

        I think dreams can change. I know they have for me. I value things different now then I did when I was 21. Maybe she just reached this point quicker then I had. I know that for the right guy, I would give up a career to focus on my marriage and family. And I wouldn’t feel degraded for that. Infact, I think the kind of lifestyle where I could focus on my marriage and family would be more fulfilling then any career. Isn’t today about have the freedom to make our own choices whether they be successful careers or families or both? And having the freedom to adjust our lives when certain things no longer apply without judgement?

        • “Isn’t today about have the freedom to make our own choices whether they be successful careers or families or both? And having the freedom to adjust our lives when certain things no longer apply without judgement?”

          No, it isn’t. The day that you describe will never come.

    • Whereas I think the message young people should glean is: have bigger dreams. Whether modeling lingerie is okay or not, whether submitting to one’s spouse is applauded or lamented, I hope that neither would be the solitary goal of her life.

  5. Thaddeus in Brazil, are you still out there?

    If not, I am willing to guess what you might say here: compared to what women here in Brazil wear on a regular basis, I don’t see what the big deal is. Only her husband is allowed to see her bare midriff? Why is a bare stomach considered sexually provocative? What she wears on stage is what Brazilian women wear to go grocery shopping. You North American WASP’s are so uptight.

    How’d I do? : – ) I mean this imitation as the sincerest form of flattery. I’m caricaturing what I think is actually a very good point that I would agree with. (It’s not an ad hominem attack, I swear! Feel free to caricature me in reply.)

  6. Like anything else, religion is a journey. People grow in it at different rates. Just because she wanted to become a VS model and did, and now has decided it no longer fits into her life, doesn’t make her hypocritical. It will be interesting to see what kind of modeling she does do. Some ads can be very provocative with a fully dressed woman. But the journey is still hers. A Christian will be the first to tell you they aren’t perfect. Doesn’t make them any less Christian or hypocritical if their heart is sincere.

    • thanks for being a voice of reason on this comment stream.

    • yes THANKS. I was about to be sick if there wasn’t someone with a decent comment sooner or later, although I do enjoy the banter. People who think Christianity is bogus are probably the most interesting to chat with! Anyways, I comment her for the step she took for whatever reason she did. I don’t know why people have such issues with Christianity if it isn’t true anyways. Or wait…could it possibly be? and could it be that it tends to ruffle some feathers…get under some peoples’ skin? Because if it IS true, then what? hmm…

      • I meant to say that I “commend” her.

      • NickMostly says:

        It’s arrogance and ignorance to think that what ruffles feathers is the possibility that Christianity might be true. You don’t hear atheists railing against the Jains or Buddhists for one simple reason: those religions aren’t trying to insert themselves in our court houses, in our schools, and in our state houses. They’re not blowing shit up in the name of their preferred deity, and they’re not legislating the activities I can engage in consensually in my bedroom. They don’t show up on my doorstep with tracks, they don’t make moral pronouncements about the evils of homosexuality while renting a boy on the side. Quite simply, their religion is a deeply held personal conviction, and if Christians followed that model I wouldn’t care what they believed.

      • ” Or wait…could it possibly be? and could it be that it tends to ruffle some feathers…get under some peoples’ skin? Because if it IS true, then what? hmm…”

        Assuming that something is true because it provokes hostility or opprobrium may be a dubious assumption. The Westboro Baptist Church “tends to ruffle some feathers” when they chant that child murder victims are doing to hell. Does that mean that the Westboro Baptist Church’s teachings are true?

        • I apologize. I should not have asked why people have issues with Christianity. There are endless reasons for anyone and everyone to have issues with Christianity. I should have said the teaching of Jesus and Jesus himself. I personally do not think Jesus and his teachings are the issue. People and the way they live out their so-called religious beliefs are the problem.

          And of course just because hostility is provoked by something does not mean it is true. Good point. I deserved to be called out on that bold statement.

  7. She says her body is for her husband’s eyes only.

    Do you know what this means? Don’t you see what’s happening, people? The Taliban have infiltrated the heart of the American media industry! The war in Afghanistan is going much worse than anyone thought. Not sure how drone strikes are going to help in this case.

    Yeah, I know, whatever, the Taliban are Muslim and she says she’s a Christian, but if it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck….

  8. Probably pregnant dropped from her contract/fired by VS or another mormon or cult thing.

  9. I feel sorry for her. Making big decisions and sudden life changes is a really bad idea when just starting to read the bible its when you are most unstable and judgement is impaired because you don’t have the whole story or understanding yet.. People make unnecessary self destructive decisions only to find they were fine just as they were or end up in a dangerous cult., before understanding life is no better and your eventuality is the same serving god or not all is vanity and striving after wind. Also he could run off with the Nanny, they could get divorced, he could be secretly gay. As she learns about the bible DON’T MAKE ANY SUDDEN CHANGES in lifestyle or big money decisions it takes people years to really understand and form your own opinions and be your own person spiritually till then people will jerk her around.

  10. Richard Aubrey says:

    Personal choice. Free country. Why is it anybody’s business?

  11. wellokaythen says:

    This is probably just my cynicism talking, but this announcement sounds like a celebrity bailing out before a crash, or a politician leaving office to “spend more time with his family” before the scandal breaks. It’s an unassailable excuse, one of those “aww, that’s sweet” moments that only the most cynical (ahem) would ever challenge. Although, to be fair, it’s hard to imagine what she could have done that would be more scandalous than Kate Moss or Naomi Campbell. I’m guessing something much more mundanely embarassing, like an ugly, chronic skin condition. Or perhaps in the world of Victoria’s Secret modeling, 21 is the age of grizzled veterans.

    Cynical or not, at least it’s an announcement that’s grammatically correct and makes some sort of logical sense. It uses complete sentences and appeals to principle. It’s a classy move, whether sincere or not. No matter what is going on, she is probably making the most out of a challenging situation.

    And, there’s something to be said for leaving a career or a job at the apex, going out on a high note.

    P.S. If only her husband gets to see her in lingerie, then maybe now is the time to talk about polyandry, i.e., having multiple husbands? Perhaps millions of husbands. If marriage is so wonderful and sacred, wouldn’t more of it be better than less of it? : – )

  12. In my opinion, she is being extremely hypocritical.

    How can anyone hold Christian beliefs while at the same time be hurdling through space on a planet that is over 4 billion years old? That she may or may not be wearing lingerie while doing so is really beside the point.

    • This is the best post I’ve read on internet for years! Short but so true; It is sad that so many people on earth just cannot understand this very simple point.

    • wellokaythen says:

      Ah, but don’t you see, God planted that scientific evidence in order to test our faith. He planted so much of this scientific evidence suggesting billions of years that the test is really, really hard to pass. You gotta really really work at it, really let faith take over other parts of your mind, if you want to pass this test, and it sounds like you’re failing. ; – )

      Instead, I think you’re supposed to go with the calculations of the Bishop Ussher from the seventeenth century. Using a Bible and some simple math, he calculated that the universe began at 9am, October 23, 4004 BC.

      The good news is, if you’re swallowed by a big fish or whale, there’s a good chance you’ll survive if you’re a true believer. And, I have to say I like the idea of turning water into wine. Pinot Noir, if I get to make a request.

    • In defence of the religious people I know who aren’t idiots – a lot of Christian people I know believe in evolution. They just think God got the ball rolling, so to speak.

      But that was still damn funny.

    • There are MANY Christians who do not believe in a “young” earth or in a literal interpretation of Genesis. I’d venture to say they are in the majority.

      • This is very true. Pope John Paul II actually said at one point that everything before the Big Bang is the province of religion, and everything after is a question of science. That’s quite a big revolutionary statement that hasn’t gotten the attention that it warrants. And a few popes before him admitted, yeah, okay, that Galileo guy was right after all.

    • How are you so sure the earth is billions of years old?

      • Radiometric analysis of terrestrial, lunar and extra-terrestrial rocks and minerals.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

        • That is what I supposed. There is lots of research out now discussing the inaccuracy of radiometric dating. It’s quite intriguing.

          • Some trite discussion of a lingerie model becomes a segue for every possible agenda. Hooray. I’m sure that your “lots of research” are a fun and beloved secret.

          • It’s neither interesting nor intriguing nor “lots.”

            Look, I was an ordained member of the Seventh Day Adventists, who were the originators of the pseudo-scientific young earth creation theory. They were the ones responsible for the “research” questioning the methods of determining age, and their principle method was to attack radio carbon dating. The “Creation Scientists” took this ball and ran with it.

            But here’s the thing: they’re not scientists. They admit they’re not specialists in the fields they’re questioning. They admit the purpose of their attacking the science is to show the truth of the bible. They admit that the reason you should believe them is because God is on their side.

            They lie. They lie about the “conflict” among scientists about evolution. There is no dispute among scientists about the “if” of evolution. There is no dispute among scientists about the “how long” of evolution. The research in question now revolves around the “how exactly.”

            There is no dispute about radiometric dating. Scientists agree that it is not a precise measurement, but by “precision” they’re talking about ±20%, not ±10000%. The creation “scientists” would have you believe that the methods are so inaccurate that they might be off by five or six orders of magnitude. That’s just nonsense.

            Scientists don’t have an agenda to prove Christianity wrong. A lot of the early scientists were Christians. It just so happens that all of the science points to an old earth and none of the science points to a young earth.

            There was a time when heliocentricity was in dispute. It wasn’t disputed among the scientists – many had independently determined that the sun was at the center of our solar system. The dispute always has been and always will be among religions where our scientific knowledge comes into conflict with their scriptural understanding.

            This isn’t a problem for all Christians. There are many who have no problem reconciling the bible against scientific knowledge. They see the genesis stories as metaphor for the creation of the universe, and see God as the instigator of the actual creation of the universe as we know it, with the apparent age that we see, a “prime mover” if you will. It’s only those Christians who need the bible to be inerrant in all things, for the creation story (the flood story, the Jericho story…) to be literally true, who have a problem with our scientific understanding of the universe.

            I remember having a problem believing in the relativity of time. How is it possible that time can be faster or slower in space than on earth? Then I learned about different theories of time (A-theory and B-theory). And then I did the math, and the math works. And the math is not just theoretical – the math is what allows a ballistic missile launched from a cruise ship to reach its target with precision. The math is what makes the GPS unit in your phone possible.

            But when I was religious, my religious indoctrination wouldn’t allow me to see that the science just works. I was told that “doubt” was a seed planted by the devil. I was told not to listen to science or reason – those too were of the devil. Instead I was to believe everything written in this book was true. The reason I could believe the book was true is because the book said it was true. And of course since I couldn’t prove the book wasn’t true without using rational thought, it must be true.

            I feel sorry for people who still fall prey to that nonsense. I really do. But I’m not out to de-convert them, that’s just not my style. Instead I’m more interested that they not push their religious dogma in the public sphere. I’ve got no (real) problem with the fact that you don’t “believe” the science around the age of the universe, just don’t try to teach my kids that nonsense in the public schools.

            • I appreciate this. Thanks for pushing back. I didn’t need to come on strong, because I am totally undecided about the young v. new earth. I also do not think it makes much difference to my belief about the Bible. Like many others, I’m not convinced the 6 day creation was meant literally.

  13. Dan, Just Dan says:

    She is missing a chance at one of the greatest evangelical opportunities ever. Picture it: a giant tattoo on her stomach: “John 3:16” just like the guy in the endzone. Or “GOD” with the “O” encircling her bellybutton.

  14. It’s almost comical to see how some people are talking about how she should never had become a Victoria Secret Model if this is how she felt, or how her husband must be pressuring her, as if we’ve all had EVERYTHING figured out, by the time we were 21.

    People tend to grow in their beliefs as they become older. Most of us didn’t have fully formed beliefs on all aspects of life until we are older, get married and have children. Even then, we are still growing, still learning and start to realize that maybe some aspects of our lives need a change.

    I applaud her for realizing that maybe fame and fortune are NOT the most important things in life and her putting her family and her faith first should be applauded and congradulated.

  15. I don’t get it. Victoria’s Secret sells women’s clothing. Why would men be looking at the catalogs if the catalogs are for women’s clothing? Unless….wait….you don’t think….hold on…. are MEN the target audience for the catalog? I am shocked and surprised. I never would have imagined such a thing. This is the first I’m hearing about this phenomenon. Does the company know that a lot of the catalog viewers are men?

    I’ll say it if no one else will: this makes her more attractive. Not so much because I think principles can be sexy, but the idea of being in her husband’s position makes it hot. I can only imagine that this will change the way the men in her congregation view her, literally or figuratively. Now they will have to use their imaginations when trying to picture her without any clothes on – no current photos of it anymore. This will actually be to those men’s benefit in the long run. Imagination is too undervalued as a masturbatory stimulant, and it’s important to be able to daydream during a long, boring sermon. I say this as someone who went to church every Sunday until I was 18. I can’t believe I’m the only churchgoer who was ever like this.

    • “I don’t get it. Victoria’s Secret sells women’s clothing. Why would men be looking at the catalogs if the catalogs are for women’s clothing? Unless….wait….you don’t think….hold on…. are MEN the target audience for the catalog? I am shocked and surprised. I never would have imagined such a thing. This is the first I’m hearing about this phenomenon. Does the company know that a lot of the catalog viewers are men?”

      I am sure that the company must be aghast. Just like the publishers of “Playgirl” were shocked to learn that their audience was almost entirely homosexual men.

    • Well I suppose it would be quite difficult to protect a mans mind at all then, eh? Maybe that is why we are responsible for our own thoughts and actions…?

      • “Maybe that is why we are responsible for our own thoughts and actions…?”

        Most would agree. Unfortunately, some value and belief systems assign the responsibility of one person’s thoughts and actions to other persons because those other persons supposedly “provoked” somebody else’s thoughts and actions.

  16. Megalodon says:

    Remember, Carrie Prejean, the Miss USA contestant who got attention because of her opposition to gay marriage? She started trying to market herself as an observant Christian. Then everyone started asking her if topless glamour photos and sexually oriented videotapes were consistent with Christian piety.

    If she adheres to her Christian beliefs and believes in the Christian notion of “modesty,” I do not see how she can be any kind of model. All modeling that utilizes conventionally attractive, young white women is sexually oriented and titillating by design. Whether it is ridiculous undergarments, or skinny jeans, or turtlenecks, it is an exhibition of the body. And normally, they use bodies which are considered attractive to allure viewers and buyers.

    • PursuitAce says:

      Makes sense.

    • wellokaythen says:

      Good point. I know my own male mind, and my seeing a fully clothed model is no impediment to the sorts of mental images she’s hoping to prevent. If she switches to other forms of modeling, she is just shifting the sexual focus to new territory.

      • I dare say that being a fully clothed model versus a fully clothed women period, then, would cause many male minds to imagine sexual images. It’s impossible for a woman to really take responsible for the wandering thoughts of a male.

  17. Chris in NC says:

    Forgive my cynicism, but I can’t help but wonder if her husband is guilting her with religion to hide his jealousy or discomfort with other men being able to see her wearing very little. I must admit that I’d probably be pretty uncomfortable and I’m not terribly religious. Notice, however, how she basically said that this decision is because her marriage hangs in the balance if she didn’t make this decision. Anyone else pick up on that subtext?

    That said, if her convictions are true, I don’t fault her for acting on how she believes. I’ve just known too many people who have been (how do I say this nicely?) “changed” by a more religious spouse. I’m often skeptical of those who outwardly express their religious beliefs in the public sphere. Perhaps that’s because I’m not of an evangelical background…? (I am Catholic and given my faith’s history [anyone up for an inquisition?!] I’m not all about proselytizing or evangelism.)

    • I LOVE discussing the things you mention. I’m curious, what makes you skeptical of those who outwardly express their religious beliefs in the public sphere? Of course, I can’t blame you, but I also wonder how one of truth belief in Jesus could truly not do so. I came from a protestant background and would probably be labeled now as “evangelical,” although I don’t really “fit in” there either. I’m more one of what some call a “beyond evangelical.” There isn’t really a label for it, but this might help understand if you are really all that curious. http://frankviola.org/2012/01/18/evangelicalism2/

      but anyways, I just wanted to ask you that question, ha!

  18. DavidByron says:

    Tom! Does spelling Kim Kardashian’s name wrong get men brownie points with wives? Maybe enough to make up for posting big pictures of semi-naked Victoria’s Secret models. 🙂

    I don’t see anything wrong with what she decides to do, although I suspect she made her decision for herself, and not her husband.

  19. This sounds like she has decided that her job conflicted with her religion (and possibly her marriage) and religion (and possibly the marriage) won.

    She has said that she will only model for brands that don’t ask her to do lingerie, thus not conflicting with her beliefs.

    To me it just sounds like she had a change of heart.

    (But I’ll admit that part of me thinks this is because she thinks she has been out there long enough to use the lingerie modeling as a spring board to something else, possibly what she really wanted to do in the first place. She would not be the first person that used the fame from one industry to get their foot in the door of a different industry.)

  20. Brilliant. Boldest and most noble move by a model I know about. HOw awesome would it be if this becomes a trend -even for the unmarried ones.

  21. Sue Smith says:

    That this young lady is changing from something she once did but now finds inappropriate for her is an action to be praised. If she goes back to being a lingerie model believing it to be inappropriate, she would be flip flopping and would also be hypocritical. One change does not maker a flip flopper. Doing something you consider to be wrong while telling others that doing it is wrong is hypocritical. She is trying to match her actions to her belief system.

    A thief who stops stealling and makes restitution to those from whom he or she stole is doing the right thing. At the same time he or she should come forward to the authorities and face the judicial system. If the statutes of limitation have not passed there may or may not be punishment including jail time. In some cases the judge may be able to grant mercy where there is admission of guilt and positive actions to support the statement of having a changed heart.Community service may be assigned. There may be more options. Some would exact blood a pound or more of flesh no matter what. In this example there is an admission of guilt and a change in behavior, ie. no more stealing, this would be at least the change wanted from a prisoner’s having done jail time.

  22. Long story short, no one owns her body but her. She can do what she wants with it. She can wear a burqa if she wants, or hang in a basket in Bangkok if she wants. Or both.

  23. wellokaythen says:

    I’m gonna play the omnipotence card here. God meant for her to be a lingerie model. If God didn’t want her to be a lingerie model, there’s no way that she ever would have been, because everything that happens is part of God’s will. Clearly there was some sort of divine plan that put her in those magazines and on those stages. And now she’s questioning the plan of the Almighty? Who does she think she is? When did people get the arrogant idea that they had free will?

    (Yeah, I know it goes both ways. If God didn’t want her to quit, then she wouldn’t be quitting. But come on, work with me here. If we are all made in God’s image, then it seems unholy not to celebrate the wonders of His creation. Isn’t lingerie also part of God’s plan for the universe? Who’s with me?)

    • wet_suit_one says:

      I’m totally with you. The Flying Sphagetti Monster demands that I voice my support of your position. His Noodly Appendages bless all and contain the reasons for our being.

      Ramen.

      • wellokaythen says:

        How dare you presume to write the name of the One Who Must Not be Named. You are a heretic and must be burned at the stake. Stop imposing your beliefs on other people. That’s not what the FSMist drafters of the Constitution had in mind when they set out to make this an FSM-fearing country.

    • Valter Viglietti says:

      Long, loud applauses here, wellokaythen! 😆

      The whole “God want this, God wouldn’t want that” is arbitrary. Since God never tells us what to do, or forbid us doing it, we can just guess His (Her? Its?) intentions.
      And no guess is better than another. 😉

      Personally, I think God made us (and any other creature) to enjoy life at its fullest.
      What else? :roll:

  24. P.S. Some men get all the breaks….

  25. She changed her mind over the course of a few years. That in itself isn’t hypocritical. If she were a politician people would say she’s a waffler or a flip-flopper, but politics isn’t about making sense.

    I don’t see what the big deal is. Stick a cross on the front of the demi and a cross on each of the stockings and keep strutting your stuff. Or a fish icon instead of the word PINK on the rear end. Did she ever think of some creative problem solving? She’s so narrow minded. ; – )

    Besides, she’s a model. In real life she doesn’t really look like she does in the photos anyway, or even on the runway. No one sees her real body except some stylists and photographers, and many of those are not attracted to women anyway.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      The issue for me isn’t that she’s changing her mind. I admire that she’s chosen to follow her own convictions beyond what society expects or rewards…

      However her comments sound like her husband is driving this, that she’s trying to save her marriage.

      My marriage is very important & with divorce rates rising I want to do everything I can to protect my marriage and be respectful to my husband.

      I agree she should protect her marriage, but why is this suddenly an issue? I’ve seen too many marriages crumble, and as they crumble, each member tries to find that “thing” that they can change about themselves or the other that will save the marriage. It’s worth a try, but great marriages succeed because you cultivate trust and security from the inside—inside the individual as well as the pair, and asking someone not to do the career that has launched them and at one time was their dream, seems like a recipe for disaster.

      Again, hoping this is motivated from within her primarily. If not, I foresee splitsville there. She is just *so* young.

  26. Props to her. She’s being a great role model to younger Chrisitans now. She’s showing that she’s growing up into a responsible adult who is looking at the whole picture, holding her beliefs and morals above all else and she’s trying to ensure that her marriage is faithful and lasts. If only more peoe were like her.

  27. Valter Viglietti says:

    Her body is hers, and she can do with it whatever she wants. Period.

    Having said that, it sounds hypocritical to me – at least, very likely.
    If she dropped the thing when still being not famous at all, then it would have been consistent.
    Doing it now, it sounds like “Now that I can afford better/different chances, I can use this free publicity to make me known”.
    I heard zillions of so-called Christian using their “belief” to cover up different agendas. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if she was doing this.

    “By their words I hear that most Americans are Christian.
    By their actions I see that most aren’t.”
    (Steve Pavlina)

    • wet_suit_one says:

      Amen to that.

      Amen to that indeed. It should be inscribed on Mt. Rushmore it’s so worth reading, saying and hearing over and over again. Probably ought to be inscribed into the steps of Congress, emblazoned on the White House and included in the Constitution (I know I’m treading dangerously here).

      It’s so true, it really, really hurts for a whole lot people. I know that everyone here can name such persons.

      Anyways… Rant off!

  28. Sirenofbrixton says:

    She’s only being hypocritical if she continues to accept modelling jobs for other things that her particular (& I would argue, peculiar) brand of Christian faith finds unacceptable. It’s a Good Thing generally for people to reflect on their behaviour and change it if they come to the conclusion it’s wrong. But seriously, in 2012 ‘my body is sacred & it’s just for my husband’??? She might as well wear a niqab. Clothes or the absence of them do not make the man or woman. Steve Jobs managed to become one of the most influential men in the world in jeans and a turtleneck. This is regressive thinking that I’m sure will be endorsed by the sort of people who think its ok to bully planned parenthood into giving up provision of abortion services by withdrawing funds for other services, but it should ring alarm bells for anyone who is grateful that women are no longer slaves to their biology, dependent solely on men for support. A beautiful woman choosing to make a living from the blessings of her genetics is no different from an gifted athlete earning a living from their sport.

    • “A beautiful woman choosing to make a living from the blessings of her genetics is no different from an gifted athlete earning a living from their sport.”

      Would you argue that prostitution is a career path a woman who respects herself, her marriage and her emotions would choose?

      It’s pretty clear flaunting your body to make money is not the same is kicking a ball toward a goal line. You can’t fairly compare a sport to walking around with underwear on. It’s apples and oranges.

      • wet_suit_one says:

        “Would you argue that prostitution is a career path a woman who respects herself, her marriage and her emotions would choose?

        I would make that argument. You assume no one would, and you assume that no one does this. I can categorically state that you are quite simply wrong. Simply and purely wrong. But, I suspect that you won’t believe me anyways and that’s ok. Hardly anyone else can see that they are wrong too as they don’t want to see the truth.

        So it goes…

      • wellokaythen says:

        “It’s pretty clear flaunting your body to make money is not the same is kicking a ball toward a goal line. You can’t fairly compare a sport to walking around with underwear on. It’s apples and oranges.”

        David Beckham: the new apple/orange hybrid.

    • “But seriously, in 2012 ‘my body is sacred & it’s just for my husband’?”

      This is a sentiment I understand fully. Why is putting your body on display for the gratification of members of the opposite sex some sort of liberation?

      I chose my husband and, yeah, my body is just for him. Everyone else can FOAD.

      • Megalodon says:

        “Why is putting your body on display for the gratification of members of the opposite sex some sort of liberation?”

        I don’t think that it is. But a woman submitting herself to coverture and pledging her body to be her husband’s exclusive chattel hardly seems like the more liberating option. That’s like saying that because of the problems of capitalism, it is more liberating to revert to feudalism.

    • Did you know that is 2012 and more women are slaves to their biology than ever before. Seriously, our wold has more slaves in its population than it has ever had in its history. And the majority of them are women being used as sex slaves. So, maybe in your small little grasp on life, a person is not defined by how they look or what they wear. but all over the world women are being judged and valued based strictly of how they look and their biological make up. And it is the ideology of people like you and “Wet_Suit_One” who allow things like this be overlooked and not worried about. If you honestly think that prostitution is an honest living and is beneficiary to society you need a serious reality check. Most prostitutes are not out using their body to make money for themselves, they are out using it to make money for their pimp or whoever or whatever they a indebted to or owned by. It may be an addiction or person but they are making that money for something else. Not because it is dignifying and they feel great at the end of the day. So maybe you don’t believe that a persons body is a powerful thing but it is and the demand for it is causing men women and children around the world to be forced laborers for sex. If you can live knowing that and still think that flaunting yourself for the approval of others is okay, you make me sick.

      • John Sctoll says:

        WOW, David, actually you are wrong. Most slaves are actually boys and young men enslaved to work for next to no wages or worse, carted off to fight in a war as child soldiers.

        Again David, pimps are actually are rarity.

        • John, you are right in that the perception is that this is the case. But it is actually far from the truth. check the facts and feel free to say wow to that. Pimps are not some imaginary thing that only exist in movies and stand up comedy routines. They exist and they have women working for them all over the world. But don’t think this is just some third world country problem. The Super Bowl is one of the single largest events for pimping and prostitution in the world.

          http://theresurgence.com/2012/02/02/sex-trafficking-at-the-super-bowl

          Also the US Department of State estimates around 27 million people are enslaved around the world today. They also believe that 80%, are women and girls being trafficked for various sexual enterprises. Don’t believe me? Check it out, and let other people know.

          http://abolitionmedia.org/about-us/modern-slavery-statistics

          Here is another person that will let you in on how skewed society’s perception is. Seriously, you should ACTUALLY watch it, as should anyone else reading this.

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ddPHfYDkDE

          Please tell me that you see that slave trade is much more that just men being traded for physical labor, and is a real problem in our world today. Check out IJM for more facts and ways you can help.

          http://www.ijm.org/our-work/injustice-today

          • NickMostly says:

            David, none of those sites you’ve listed provide any evidence for Super Bowl sex trafficking. It appears to be just hype. Here’s one take on it, if you care to read a contrary opinion that isn’t trafficking in hyperbole.
            Superbowl Sex Trafficking Increase? Super Nonsense

            • And your site hays no evidence against it. Hearsay by a supposed FBI “special agent”? That sounds really reliable. If you watched the video you might understand that pimps do force girls into sex and if you use common sense it wouldn’t be that far fetched of an idea that people who are selling sex are going to take their supply where the demand is.The fact that you could respect an article that says pimping underage girls isn’t that big of a deal is amazing to me. There is no way you could have read all of what i posted and watched that video so instead of immediately blowing off what I said why don’t you try to learn a little bit.

              • NickMostly says:

                I’ve been reading about prostitution and sex trafficking for the past six years, and I’ve learned to differentiate between hype and fact. Take the 250,000 number in your first link (and yes, I did read all of your links, but I didn’t bother to watch the video because based on the description it didn’t look like it was going to contain any data). That number has been widely reported but it’s not true. Take the 100,000 – 300,000 number Ashton mentioned on Piers Morgan. Also not true. There is no crime data to support it and simple population statistics show it’s simply not possible.

                And “hearsay” by a supposed FBI special agent? Are you kidding me? Perhaps you should travel to Dallas and inform Robert Casey Jr. that he is only a “supposed” special agent. Or you could just look him up on the FBI website. Nah, that would be too difficult, and might suggest that perhaps you might have gotten something wrong.

                None of which is to say that sex trafficking doesn’t exist. It’s not to say it isn’t terrible. It isn’t to say that some countries (Thailand and Cambodia, for example) don’t have serious problems with children in the sex trades. What I don’t understand is the need to exaggerate and hype evil to make a point. It becomes a distraction, and instead of focusing on the problems as they exist we divert resources to problems that don’t.

                And, for the record, you don’t need to lecture me on prostitution and pimps. My sister was a prostitute, my father a reformed pimp, I’ve known and grown up around pimps, and I know plenty of women who’ve turned to the sex trades out of desperation. I’ve done more than just read a few exaggerated articles on the Internet, it’s been an intimate part of my life.

        • wellokaythen says:

          Hmm…military recruiters and draft boards as pimps engaged in human trafficking. I had never thought of things that way, but there’s something to that. My kneejerk reaction is that it’s totally different, but the more I think about it….

          • When it’s child soldiers it’s not draft boards though. They’re not hiring 16 years old kids that try to pass off as 18. They’re “hiring” by force 10 years old kids, who have no say, and are cannon-fodder.

  29. The reason given by model Kylie Bisutti for quitting modeling for Victoria’s Secret is hypocritical. Since she was an adult and married when she started modeling for Victoria’s Secret , she must have certainly known about the Christian view on modeling for lingerie. She should know that Christian girls do not look up to lingerie models as an inspiration and they are viewed rather negatively. BTW, what is the career span of runaway fashion model? 2-5 years. In simple words, she is making virtue out of necessity.

    • How many 19 year olds would you say have their head on straight, regardless if they’re married or not? I know very few. And honestly, even if she is doing this out of necessity, who cares? It’s refreshing to hear about someone valuing their body, their marriage, and themselves, in a world where the opposite is not only common, it’s praised and expected.

      • “How many 19 year olds would you say have their head on straight, regardless if they’re married or not?”

        I have seen even 15 years old boys with their head on straight and 60 year old men who do not have their head on straight. That does not absolve anybody of responsibility of their actions.

        “And honestly, even if she is doing this out of necessity, who cares?”

        Actions speak louder than words. A hypocritical rant does not affect anything.

        • She’s quitting. That’s an action. She used words to explain that action, that’s true, but she also followed through. So I’ve yet to see what point you’re trying to make.

          • If she cared for Christian values, she should not have started at first. Values are not like clothes that you can change anytime.

            • Joanna Schroeder says:

              I wholly disagree with you, Rapses. Humans have enormous capacity for growth and change. My values systems have matured over time, and I hope others’ have as well.

              Many people find religion as adults and live very happy, fulfilled, good lives.

              • The words used by model Kylie Bisutti for her reasons do not show no repentance or admittance that what she did was wrong. She is pretending as if she is doing a great favor to young Christian girls by quitting as she is a great role model for them.

            • I agree with you on that, but it is possible, and very likely, since she said so herself that she’s been reading the Bible MORE, that before she had been a Christian in name only, and has since grown to be one in reality, is it not? Which is why we should be applauding her, not condemning her.

              • Whether she models for Victoria’s Secret or not is completely her personal business The problem is the her hypocrisy. She is not going now to feed hungry people in developing country or doing charity work for homeless. She would continue modeling. My beef is people misusing religion for their professional decisions.

                • Is it not possible she is using her religion to form her morals and personal values? Those then influence professional decisions such as this one. Someone truly faithful in their religion will allow their religious beliefs to influence their profession as their religious beliefs become the basis of who they are.

                  • There is a slight difference between giving a reason and making excuses.

                    • There’s also a difference between making a point and arguing simply to argue.

                    • @Lauren Jean

                      Please read her statement carefully and analyze the construction of sentence and choice of words. It apparently is cleat that her husband is not very comfortable her modeling for lingerie and causing stress in marriage. That seems the reason for her quitting and Christian values is just a window dressing.

                    • It is possible for both reasons, her husband and her faith, to be true and in agreement. And both are great reasons to quit.

                • How is she misusing her religion for her professional decision? She’s quitting the thing that can easily be decisive in her marriage, and doesn’t exactly line up with what her religion calls for. Makes sense. She’s not quitting modelling as a whole because her religion has nothing against it as a whole. That would be like saying because Christianity says no to sex when you’re not married, that you shouldn’t have sex at all, even when you are married! And whose to say that while continuing her career, she won’t use it to benefit charities? It’s much easier for a celebrity to raise money for it than some house mom.

                  • If she is quitting it to save her marriage then she should say it forthright rather than use Christian values as excuse.

                    • But her Christian values are why she thinks this will help her marriage. Plus the fact that Christianity does place a value on saving yourself for your marriage alone. I think it’s great that another celebrity is making a public stand for it.

                    • Analyzing the series of events. She was 19 years old married woman winning Victoria’s Secrets Model contest and modeling for it for 2 years and then suddenly quitting it to save marriage. All the talk of Christian values from her seems a farce.

            • Yes you can change your values. When I was five I valued nap time, when I was in college I valued long weekends, now as an adult I value time I can spend with my family and friends. Values evolve as on grows older and finds themselves.

        • Rapses: After reading all the comments on your thread, I must say I disagree with you. You are calling a woman who is changing her actions to align more with what she believes a hypocrite, and I find that to be the exact opposite of a hypocrite. She has come to the realization that what she believes in and what she does for a living contradict, and for that reason she is changing. A hypocrite would come to this realization and not change a thing. Everyone out there messes up or makes a mistake, and maybe she made a mistake when she went to work for VS. But she is taking responsibility for that mistake and moving on. So, if you have ALWAYS lived by your word, NEVER changed your views on what is right and what is wrong, NEVER messed up in anyway shape or form, and NEVER done anything that contradicts the values and beliefs by which you live, then fine; condemn her all you want. But if you haven’t been so perfect, and I doubt you have (I know I haven’t), then you, Rapses, are the actual hypocrite here.
          You also mention that values are not like clothes. I would argue that they might be. What you value was not written on your birth certificate when you were born for you to live by for all your days. They developed as you grew and probably still are growing. Values are also not like a social security number; they do change all the time. People go through different stages of life all the time and what they value and believe may change with those stages. Some change for the better and some for the worse. But regardless, a person’s values and beliefs are not set in stone. So maybe her Christian values to honor herself and her husband grew or changed or maybe her worldly values to be appreciated or lusted for or to make money changed or dissipated. Regardless something inside of her changed so she changed what she was showing on the outside as well. (Again, sort of sounds the opposite of hypocritical to me.)
          You also say that she isn’t doing any good for young Christian girls who might be looking up to her. Sure she is! She is showing them lots of great values. She is an example of people that can change their ways for the better. She is showing that there is more than just being applauded for how you look. She is showing them that their body is something personal and that flaunting it for everyone to see may not be the best thing. I can’t think of many mothers or fathers of any religion or believe that wouldn’t mind their teenage daughter hearing that. She also shows that some people can gain fame and fortune and not end up like a Paris Hilton or Lindsey Lohan. If I had a daughter I would much rather her look up to someone like this than a Miley Cyrus who is proclaiming loud and clear that she is not a kid anymore and that being a modest person who doesn’t party all the time is childish. Which I think is a stupid message but that’s for a different conversation.
          Lastly, you say that if she is doing it just to save her marriage she needs to come out and just say it which she does. She states that divorce rates are high and she doesn’t want to be one of those statistics. Christian values would teach to eliminate anything from your marriage that causes stress or distraction. And that is what she is doing. She is eliminating something from her life that she has been putting above her marriage. Sounds to me like a smart thing to do. The stupid, hypocritical thing to do would be to say I want to honor my beliefs and also protect my marriage and I Know what is standing between me and those two things, but I’m not going to do anything about it. She is doing something about it, and for that I applaud her.
          So that’s my reflections on what you said. I hope that you take it into consideration with all of your “analysis”.

          • Respected Mr. David: It would have saved both of us lot of trouble if instead of you hurting your fingers typing this huge comment have stressed you eyes and brains a little more and read the OP and my comments in proper context. What has this lady done anything consistent with Christian values before quitting lingerie modelling? If she had an iota of values she must have never started with lingerie modelling. If a butcher starts supporting vegetarianism, people would naturally suspect something fishy. Lingerie models would be one of the last professional groups who have any authority of preaching Christian values. I agree with you that values do change with time, but the changes are gradual and small. Here the change in her values is complete 180 degree turnaround within a period of two weeks. Values are not clothes that you can change everyday. As for her being a role model for young Christian girls, I would like to remind you that in traditional families modelling is viewed rather negatively, so I do not think any Christian girls looks up to her. If she is trying to save her marriage I wish her best, she is doing it for her own private reason which has nothing to do with any religious belief. There all her self-righteousness is a farce.

            • Julie Gillis says:

              “If a butcher starts supporting vegetarianism, people would naturally suspect something fishy.” Actually, I’d think that the butcher had had an epiphany of some kind. I know lots of former meat eaters who have become vegan. People do and can change their values. Sometimes it appears sudden because they have been thinking on it hard for a long time. The change seems immediate when the seed was growing for years, perhaps.

              I agree with you though, Rapses, that there may be something else more cynical going on here. Like a PR push to get her in the news. I find the self righteous thing a really unappealing part of some modern (and more evangelical) Christianity. It’s all cool if you want to stop modeling, but why make a fuss out of it? Just quit and move on without needing anyone to notice.

              Don’t show it and tell it, just do it and live it would be my advice to her. But that’s why I smell PR. Tweet it and keep people following your new modeling career etc etc.

            • Believe me, i didn’t mind taking the time. It was a nice distraction from the poetry explication i have due at the end of the week. I have been doing so much typing my fingers are numb. Thank you for your concern though. I also have concerns for your understanding of the English language, because I am afraid that your response to me does not make much sense not so much in the sense of your argument but you sentences just plain don’t make sense though. It is three in the morning though and i have been staring at a computer screen for hours now so maybe that is a fault of my own. Regardless, I still disagree with you, people can change and it can happen fast. I can tell you might be a slow one to change but hey that is okay we all move at our own rate. I also would like to say that if a butcher becomes a vegetarian that’s cool, the guy chopped so much meat he didn’t want anything to do with it anymore. I don’t think I would find anything fishy about it. Unless that was supposed to be a pun, if so, well played. I also would like to think that I come from a “traditional” family. I am the oldest and only boy of four children, I have three little sisters, a loving mother, and a father who happens to be a baptist minister. In my 19 years of living I don’t think i have ever heard my mother or father condemn modeling to any of my sisters. I would actually imagine that this is a story my mother would find refreshing. And as for your interestingly worded remark about her iota of faith, like I said people make mistakes. Being a Christian and having Christian values doesn’t mean that you are going to get everything right and live a perfect life. We are all sinners in our own right and we fall down sometimes. The ten commandments teach to honor your mother and your father and i can tell you that i was no perfect little kid, I messed that one up all the time, even though i was constantly being taught the Christian values as you call them. Sorry if you view this as a long response again.

              • David, it would be great that if instead of focusing on how people change their values fast, you focus on the merits of this case and the statement of the person concerned. You say your age is 19 years which is almost half my age and in my life I have seen many people in entertainment, fashion and politics becoming religious overnight and after a brief period returning to their old ways. She is just a show off hiding her decision to quit for some personal reasons behind the pretense of adopting Christian values.

                • Rapses, that is far from the only thing I have talked about, it is you that keeps coming back to it over and over again. I am sorry that in your 41 or 42 some odd years of living (I’m guessing), you have seen how people have used religion in false ways and for the wrong reasons. it sucks, but its the world we live in. I am also a Huge Georgia Bulldawg fan. Why tell you that? Well, there are lots of great UGA fans out there and there are some bad ones that give the rest of us a bad name. I don’t think that it is fair of you to give anything that has to do with a person’s faith a bad name just because you have seen it happen before. That would be just like someone saying all UGA fans are drunk idiots because that’s how they percieved some of them at a football game. And the fact of the matter is, you may be right, maybe she has alternative motives and is just using this as a cover up. But just as equally as you might be right, you might be wrong. She is the only person that knows her true motives, and for that reason I don’t think you are in the position to call her a hypocrite.

                  • David, I have always been skeptical of people who start caring about the values overnight. I do not know her motives for certain but neither can you. Her new found self righteous attitude creates doubt. If she wants to quit who can stop her but why make such grand statement on public forum. You know humility is virtue.

                    • Humility is definitely a virtue, I agree with you on that. And again, you may be right. Only time will rally tell. But I don’t think we are really in the position to call her a hypocrite yet.

  30. GirlGlad4TheGMP says:

    For me, it boils down to her her age. At 19, still wet behind the ears and newly married, she likely made some uninformed, and clearly non-experiential choices. She’s 21 now and while that’s not quite a ripe age for such opinions/decisions (in MY mind), she does have 2 more yaers under her belt, 2 years of lingerie modelling, 2 years of inner monologue on her actions and choices, 2 years of marriage in which she decides to make the more informed decisions she deems best for not only her, but for her husband/family.

  31. Kudos to her. I have made some choices that at the time seemed like a good idea, but later, in the midst of them realized they were not in my best interest. Not only is she protecting her marriage from outside voyeurs, she’s protecting it from unnecessary conflict. Would your spouses want others to have all access to your body? Marriage is designed for two people, not just emotionally. Physically. Meaning sex and otherwise. The difference between sending out text pictures wearing underwear and broadcasting it to the nation is the size of the audience. Personally, I’m proud of her for choosing her husband over Victoria’s secret.

  32. It doesn’t seem hypocritical to me, especially if she’s just coming to this conclusion. Perhaps she’s new to faith or is becoming more committed, and realized that her lifestyle didn’t add up to what she claimed she believed.

    I think this is all up to her and her husband. While most Christians don’t think that walking around in lingerie is “modest”, I do think she can still reserve her body for her husband in a way and still be a model. However, if her husband was uncomfortable with her being ogled by all the people who tune in for the runway show, and she agreed, then she should do what she believes is right.

    It’s all up to the two of them, and what she and her husband decide is most honoring and respectful for her marriage. Besides, she could always go more towards clothing and less lingerie and still accomplish the same thing.

  33. She can do what she likes. Add one more slot to the 2012 Model Search!

  34. I can’t see how choosing from your own growing conviction to devote yourself more deeply to something you want to protect could ever be labeled as sexist. Dang, way to go, Kylie for standing up for what you believe in while in a world that pushes only success! That’s strength right there.

  35. I think it’s admirable. Yes, she had entered in while she was a Christian, but we all know that there are several people who call themselves Christian, and don’t resemble it at all. So why should we bash her for making a change so she’s more closely resembling what her faith calls her to be? It would be more hypocritical if she announced she was a Christian and stayed, no?

  36. Julie Gillis says:

    It’s easy to view it as hypocritical since she’s made a nice living so far. Plus, any photos of her are already shared with the world. So people can view her body all they want. But it’s her decision and her faith so I don’t ding her for that. I dislike any religion that places that particular kind of pressure on men and women to view bodies as things to be saved, but that’s just me.

    • How can you dislike a religion for encouraging purity. It’s not like she did something crazy like genial mutilation. Here is a woman who is beautiful and aspiring model. What girl wouldn’t want the chance to be a Victoria’s Secret model, when the whole society is telling everyone that this is the pinnacle of beauty. But then, as she is part of the scene, she realizes that the objectification of wearing lingerie for a living is conflicting with her martial vows, and chooses her marriage over that. What an amazing decision to make. It is rare that people place such high value on marriage, and laudable that she did.

      • Julie Gillis says:

        I don’t think being sexual defiles the body is what I meant. Being beautiful and visible as a model doesn’t defile her body necessarily. I think she can be an amazing wife, lover and mother and still pose for VS. I don’t hold much respect for religions that place issues of sexual purity on men or women’s bodies. But I think she has every right to make those decisions for herself.

        • wet_suit_one says:

          I concur. I feel sorry for the brainwashed all over the world. There is a danger in the dictates of religions the world over that make the natural “sinful.”

          Anyways…

          • NickMostly says:

            I tripped and fell down the rabbit hole yesterday reading about the Prop 8 decision and the legal rationale for it and wouldn’t you know I came across discussion about how the justices found a “right to privacy” within the constitution (specifically, the 4th, 5th, 9th, and 14th amendments). Before that, it would have been permissible for the states to prohibit any and all sexual activity outside of marriage.
            And sometimes they did.
            Can you imagine prohibiting sex outside of marriage? A scenario where you need a license (marriage) from the state to be able to have sex? It takes religion to convince people that something as basic as having consensual sex was something that needed to be regulated.

          • When did Victoria Secret fashion shows and padded bras with frills all over them become ‘natural’? Now mind you, I love me some lingerie – I wear it every night, including right now. But let’s not kid ourselves into a discourse of the ‘sinful’ juxtaposed against the ‘natural’… in a Victoria Secret context. Really, now. I’m not religious and I’m definitely not Christian in spiritual orientation but I definitely think that if our society is going to hold very, very young women [read girls] up as icons; sexual, cultural or otherwise which it frequently does, we’re going to have to learn to accept that many of these TEENAGERS are not particularly too bright in making decisons regarding their entire futures or their religious convictions. Were you? I mean, just because someone wears a DD doesn’t make them an adult, folks. But I digress, the point is, given her age and the ages of many of the other girls we proudly knight as celebrities and sex symbols, we shouldn’t be surprised when some of these sexual or cultural icons actually experience intellectual, or in this case, spiritual growth spurts while in the limelight. She was just a kid – sorry to put it so bluntly, but that’s the reality – and we should learn to contextualize realistic factors like lack of maturity when considering why she opted out of lingerie modeling. Not to mention, these are confusing times. Consider the hegemonic context which fostered this girl’s development: we (in the West) live in such hypocritical societies where 19 year olds are supposedly so grown, grown ass men lust after them and some of these girls aren’t even university age yet, the far right (usually Christian identified) host, judge, and encourage female pageantry all over the world and masquerade it as ‘wholesome’ and supporting ‘traditional values’. How they hell would she know what was right or wrong for herself? It’s confusing as hell. If she’s suddenly realized that she’s not living in alignment with her values, then good-got-dam for her.

      • NickMostly says:

        “Purity”
        Now there’s a concept for you.
        It would take a book for me to unpack all that is contained in that one word. Fortunately that book has already been written. (trigger warning: link leads to website of a feminist author)
        For something less divisive, perhaps, we can look at political leanings and how concepts of purity relate to our moral interactions with each other and our world. Jonathan Haidt, a professor from the University of Virginia, has written extensively about the role purity plays in our morality and how that determines our religious and political leanings. I recommend his TED presentation on the moral roots of liberals and conservatives as an introduction to his ideas before perusing some of his writing.

  37. I don’t think it’s hypocritical at all. From what I was able to gather from what you posted above, she began to grow in her faith and began to feel differently about the job she had. Maybe when she entered the contest at 19, she wasn’t as strong in her beliefs. Regardless, I give her credit for standing up for what she believes in and hope she isn’t criticized for doing so.

    • I totally agree with u Patrick! I really hope this makes a positive impact & I just wish that other women valued themselves & thought more about how what is done now really affects their marriage tremendously!

Speak Your Mind

*